[rocket_surgeron]

I think cryptocurrencies should be ranked by the mass in kilograms of the actual, real, physical products and the weight of people performing actual, real, services that have been paid for using them.

Arbitrage and exchange, and all of the people and infrastructure surrounding those, would have no mass in this ranking system.

"What about online stuff?"

Well, yeah. If you pay for a small instance VPS using bitcoin then you get credit for 1/64th of the weight of that PowerEdge R7525 you're renting and the 375 lbs dev you hired to run your site. Unless it's an exchange or trading platform, of course.

[fallat]

Pretty much this in a vague way. Obviously not exactly as the comment is written, but yes, it should be measured in the actual usage of the tokens.

[redox99]

One decent metric are the fees[1]. Basically how much money people are actually spending to use the cryptocurrency.

Raw usage (as in number of transactions) is meaningless because it can be trivially manipulated by wash trading if the fees are super low (typical of a barely used chain).

[1] https://cryptofees.info/

[cowtools]

It's a pretty funny idea, but I have a pretty good idea of how it would end up:

"Yes, I would like to purchase a thousand stone bricks. Do you accept BrickCoin?"

[hinkley]

GDP?